Thursday, 3 March 2011

Thirteen years of Labour illustrated very clearly that the lefty mindset of passing poorly though-out laws, based on blind ideology, is a recipe for a hangar-load of unintended consequences. Naturally, when presented with the disastrous fallout (before or after legislating), the general response is to simply place a couple of digits in each ear and pretend nothing is awry or, if that isn't an option, to compound the error by doing something utterly daft.

San Francisco's big push for low-flow toilets has turned into a multimillion-dollar plumbing stink.

Skimping on toilet water has resulted in more sludge backing up inside the sewer pipes, said Tyrone Jue, spokesman for the city Public Utilities Commission. That has created a rotten-egg stench near AT&T Park and elsewhere, especially during the dry summer months.

The city has already spent $100 million over the past five years to upgrade its sewer system and sewage plants, in part to combat the odor problem.

It would seem that a law signed into existence by Governor Arnie in 2007 is not exactly having the desired effect. Not satisfied with crippling California's economy, the 'progressive' lunatics are finding their attempt at green toilet oneupmanship is hurtling down the pan faster than their morning dump tends to do these days.

California law should require fixture manufacturers to provide a portion of toilet and urinal models that are high efficiency on a five-year schedule, starting with 50% of fixtures offered for sale in 2010. The proportion of high-efficiency toilets increases to 67% in 2011, 75% in 2012, 85% in 2013 and 100% — except for institutional toilets — in 2014.

The stench of self-righteousness in San Fran has been increasing for many a year, but now it is being matched by the stink on its streets thanks to an inept, dogmatic push to save water for the sake of the planet.

Something has to be done about this, of course. So what has the proud, majestic, sanctimonious, world-leading administration on green policies proposed?

Now officials are stocking up on a $14 million, three-year supply of highly concentrated sodium hypochlorite - better known as bleach - to act as an odor eater and to disinfect the city's treated water before it's dumped into the bay. It will also be used to sanitize drinking water.

That translates into 8.5 million pounds of bleach either being poured down city drains or into the drinking water supply every year.

How very environmentally friendly, eh?

Still, the law must have provided benefits apart from our peals of laughter at the discomfort suffered by right-on ex-hippies who choose this ghastly mirror of a soviet state as their home, right? Well, kinda.

As for whether the supposedly environmentally friendly, low-flow toilets are worth the trouble? Well, according to Jue, they have helped trim San Francisco's annual water consumption by about 20 million gallons.

According to this website, the Gross Annual Water Sales for San Francisco in 2007/2008 was 34,137,635 ccf. One ccf is 100 cubic feet which is approximately 748 gallons/ccf

That means the gross annual water sales for San Francisco is approximately 25,534,950,980 gallons per year.

San Francisco saves 20,000,000 gallons/year from low-flow toilets.

(20,000,000 (gal/yr) / 25,534,950,980 (gal/yr) ) * 100% = .08%

So, San Francisco reduces water consumption by 8 HUNDREDTHS OF ONE PERCENT at the expense of hundreds of millions of dollars to the sewer system alone (not counting the cost to consumers of the low-flow toilets and associated plumbing problems), and they are now likely to add millions of pounds of the environmentally hazardous and corrosive bleach to their sewers.

This seems wacko even by government standards.

Not really. It's par for the course where lefties are concerned.

Give them a bit of power and everything turns to crap ... quite literally in this instance.

Fear of arrest is right. It's a $500 fine for outdoor smoking nearly everywhere, including the sidewalks, parks, plazas, alleyways, you name it, it's a $500 penalty - and fear of arrest is an appropriate response.

As far as I can recall, the list of bans in SF includes everything from working toilets to unsorted trash (a $1,000 fine) to light-bulbs to mercury thermometers to plastic bags to anything tobacco related (retail sales bans, outdoor smoking bans everywhere, tobacco licensing bans) to anything else that will promote "green" and "health" in their socialist attempt to force everyone into comformity.

And it extends from SF into Sacramento by way of state legislation resulting in things like the destruction of farmland in the Central Valley, 20%+ unemployment rates, poverty, crime and lost busineses & farms as a result. And the whole scheme is a total sin - a crime, against humanity - now evidenced by the sewage reeking on many street corners across SF as they prepare to dump untold gallons of toxic bleach in all the sewers, which will likewise result in unpleasant smells.

There are parts of town, such as coming up from the Ocean Beach area through Parkside along Lincoln Way approaching Sunset Boulevard where the stench of raw sewage is so pungent, even rolling up the car window won't make it go away. Yet they have the population engaged in their popular pastime of "let's demonize the smoker" for harmless SHS while ignoring the toxic fumes of bacteria infested raw sewage backups.

Wait until Black Plague or Cholera breaks out soon - then the left-wing junta in charge can step up their "war on smokers" to try to hide the results of their "green" lies built on scientific frauds hoping nobody notices and continues voting them into office with 80% and 90% citizen approval ratings.

Lincoln said you can fool all the people some of the time and some of the people all of the time. But Lincoln didn't live in modern day Soviet San Francisco, where fooling all the people all the time has become a modern way propaganda success story.

The outdoor no-smoking signs with penalty warnings BTW are so prevalent on every single building in all areas these days that I would not advise anyone who smokes or who is a genuine diversity tolerant person to ever waste time or money on that city actually visiting it. It's a bit like seeing how lies and falsehood can be successfully manufactured into "truth", but with it comes the after-effects, which the raw sewage and bacterial infestation pungently points out.

I used to be a building services engineer. That means dealing with a lot of shit. I'm an electrician by trade, but most of the problems in a large office building are either air conditioning (girls too cold, boys too hot) or shit related.

The general consensus I encountered when the subject was discussed- both from onsite engineers, and contracting plumbers/blockage clearers- was that the primary reason is the mania for reduced flushing to save water.

I'm a second generation California native. My mom could see the original Hollywood-land sign from her house as a child. I was born in the early fifties. The place was a paradise. Mainly surfers, dirt-bike riders and hot-rodders. No hippies though. Until about 1967.

It seemed like at least half of the East Coast Puritan Belt moved here during the next decade. Puritans are Green and Left. They took over San Fran. They thought LA was too plastic and materialistic. Now they've got LA, too.

23% of Californians were born in another state. 26% were born in another country (Mexico). Can you imagine if the UK was made up of only 50% natives. The point? San Fran is a toilet, California is a toilet. No one regrets it more than an old native of the Golden Era of the Golden State, when you could smoke at Disneyland.

"It seemed like at least half of the East Coast Puritan Belt moved here during the next decade. Puritans are Green and Left. They took over San Fran. They thought LA was too plastic and materialistic. Now they've got LA, too."

But - it is not only people from the east coast who occupy the seats of government, elected offices and head up the departments that cause all these problems, rules, bans, restrictions and basically meaningless meddling mean-spirited dicatorial left-wing parasitic mandates.

Jerry Brown, governor, second time around, former mayor of Oakland for a long time too. Pelosi, been in CA a long time. SF and LA city council members, mayors, there's lots either been in CA a long, long, long time or else were born here. Ditto with the ASSembly in Sacramento.

This isn't only about east coasters moved in and ruined everyting, I don't think. I think both coasts might be doing damage now with Bloomberg on a roll.

And don't forget, people outside of California dread when someone from California moves into their state, Californication they call it these days.

Essentially this is nonsensical and unnecessary government meddling with individuals, ruining and destroying lives and businesses, destroying wealth, health and happiness, restricting freedom and liberty, inflicting pain and even death in some instances - but it can't be only because some east coasters migrated west.

There's some native Californian left-wingers have been in cahoots with this all along too. There's blame to go around is what I am saying.

Strange how the same effect is occuring in California that is occuring here,and everywhere else in the west.Joe Mcarthy was right but not in the way he thought ,I have no doubt whatsoever about this now.

True, there's plenty of blame to go around and right you are about Brown, Pelosi and company. But, there are two distinct era's in recent California history and something, some imported demographic shift, is behind it. People born here in the first half of the 1900's didn't suddenly change from being the easy-going, experimental souls the state was once known for into ban-everything-in-sight Puritans overnight. And Bloomberg is a prime example of the east coast mentality I speak of.

Native left-wingers, like Jerry Brown's dad, were the permissives at one time, countering the strict Gov. Reagan. Conservative Gov. Deukmejian vetoed the motorcycle helmet law sent to him by a Democratic legislature. He also flew in by helicopter to raid a pot farm. The past 15 years we've really veered hard left.

Okay, Smoking at Disneyland does sound like the title of Alanis Morissette's next hit single. But as easy as it is to get snarky with cheap metaphors, I just can't seem to suppress the urge to tap my foot to "Isn't it Ironic?".

For California as well as elsewhere, some of it might be the demographics of age groups too, with the younger being more indoctrinated than their older counterparts, especially in the anti-smoking department. California did institute bans 16 years ago, among the first in the nation and world, but it could have something to do with the extremely sharp left-ward turn which would have reflected itself in the school systems through the type of political indoctrination they began receiving, and anti-smoking in California is held in high regard amongst the left-wing ruling class and politicians. But then that's not saying much since they're nearly all left-wing too. But the demographic shift may have come up through the schools and by age groups and it showed up first in California because it was the most left-ward leaning and probably still is among the 50. In the 1930's mind you, the San Francisco Chronicle was in receipt of letters directly sent by Hitler and ran front page stories extolling the virtues of Hitler and Mussolini both. So there might also be some historical background providing impetus for the push for all these so-called progressive ideas, including anti-smoking, arising out of California too.